Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout07-21-2016 Minutes BOC PB JPHPlanning Board Minutes July 21, 2016 Page 1 of 7 MINUTES JOINT PUBLIC HEARING HILLSBOROUGH TOWN BOARD and PLANNING BOARD Thursday, July 21, 2016 7:00 PM, Town Barn PRESENT: Mayor Tom Stevens, and Commissioners Jenn Weaver, Brian Lowen, Kathleen Ferguson, Mark Bell, and Evelyn Lloyd (arrived during item 8 from another meeting), Planning Board chair Dan Barker, Toby Vandemark, Lisa Frazier, Rick Brewer, James Czar, Chris Wehrman, Janie Morris, Doug Peterson, STAFF: Planning Director Margaret Hauth, Town Attorney Bob Hornik, Public Works Director Ken Hines Mayor Stevens called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. and explained the processes of the public hearing. ITEM #1: Consideration of additions or changes to the agenda Mayor Stevens said the Closed Session item regarding the potential acquisition of the Colonial Inn would be moved into regular session, just after the consent agenda. MOTION: Commissioner Ferguson moved to approve the agenda as amended. Commissioner Lowen seconded. VOTE: Unanimous ITEM #2: Consent agenda for Town Board action items: a) Budget amendments & transfers b) Authorize Manager to sign repaving contract Commissioner Lowen moved to approve the action items as presented. Commissioner Ferguson seconded. The motion carried upon a unanimous vote of 5-0. ITEM #2a: Added item – related to Closed Session item regarding negotiating terms for the acquisition of the former Colonial Inn Mayor Stevens said the town attorney sent a letter with a 30-day notice that the town intended to file for eminent domain at the higher of the two appraisal amounts, which is $250,000. Mayor Stevens asked for a motion to authorize the town attorney to the eminent domain action and deposit $250,000 with the court. Commissioner Ferguson moved approval. Commissioner Bell seconded. The motion carried upon a unanimous vote of 4-0. ITEM #3: Open joint public hearing Planning Chair Barker opened the public hearing. ITEM #4: Annexation and Rezoning request from Orange County to have 3 parcels on the south side of US 70 A East annexed and zoned Office Institutional to match the zoning of Planning Board Minutes July 21, 2016 Page 2 of 7 the Sportsplex parcel and facilitate expansion. OC PINs 9874-71-5479, 9874-71-6466, and 9874-71-7383. Ms. Hauth reviewed that in between the two entrances, the county has acquired two houses and a lot and requests the town annex that property to expand the Sportsplex. The county has petitioned for annexation and re-zoning to match the zoning of the Sportsplex. Marie Nadworny signed up to speak on this item. She lives down the road and read on a 20-year plan that her house will eventually be rezoned and annexed. She is not familiar with the process and wonders how the annexation of these parcels impacts her and that plan. Ms. Hauth said the map you are probably looking at is the Future Land Use Plan. The boundary is the maximum limit of the town’s limits and that they won’t annex beyond that line. She added the town has a long practice of annexing by petition or property owner request. It is a very difficult process for a town to go out and decide to annex. It is much more likely that any further annexations down U.S. 70 would be at the property owner’s request. We also ask that properties have water and sewer service and the applicants pay for that improvement. Ms. Hauth encouraged her to call with questions. MOTION: Ms. Vandemark moved to close the public hearing on this item. Mr. Brewer seconded. VOTE: Unanimous ITEM #5: Annexation and Rezoning request from Piney Creek Properties, LLC to have a parcel at 809 Faucette Mill Road annexed and zoned Mobile Home Park to match its current use. OC PIN 9865-43-3808. Ms. Hauth said the owner was unable to be here tonight but requested annexation for the benefit of his tenants’ water and sewer rates. There may be some residents in the audience who are interested in speaking. This area already has utilities and it is not unreasonable to entertain annexation. Mayor Stevens added that for this request, there were some pros and cons discussed by the board. It would be a satellite. The owner said he’d still arrange his own trash pick-up. We checked with police to be sure it was manageable to add this to patrols. Ms. Hauth said we usually decline to provide trash service to private roads. Rosetta Moore signed up to speak. Ms. Moore lives at 804 Faucette Mill Road right across from Piney Creek Properties. Also with her tonight are Mr. and Mrs. Leo Brooks. She said they represent 5 properties that border or are across the street. She introduced other people in the audience. Ms. Moore said they are responding to the notification they received. Ms. Moore said we have no objection to this proposal, but we are requesting that our properties be included for the following reasons: Our properties share an edge/boundary with the Piney Creek Properties. Our properties are located two-tenths to five-tenths of a mile from the town limits. We are connected to the water line. Our properties are difficult to perk for septic. We realize we are not in the time limits… We would like to be included in the City Limits request. Mayor Stevens said the process is coming to the board like this. We had several meetings with the mobile home park owner. We would be happy to get you on the agenda. I encourage you to work with staff. Piney Woods has sewer. Those who are interested in annexation should run the costs of hooking up to sewer. I think the only thing we’d be concerned about tonight is if you support or oppose the other Planning Board Minutes July 21, 2016 Page 3 of 7 annexation. Ms. Moore said we do not object. Mayor Stevens said all of those costs would be part of your consideration. We are not making a decision on the agenda item tonight. It’s a public hearing. Chair Barker said for anyone in the audience, if someone is interested in joining the town, just ask. There are consequences and perks. A resident expressed interest in speaking. He said he recently purchased lot 1 on Piney Creek. The water bill is close to $200. This is difficult for somebody who lives paycheck to paycheck. I know the town has to make money. We would really like to be annexed. MOTION: Mr. Brewer moved to close the public hearing on this item. Ms. Sykes seconded. VOTE: Unanimous ITEM #6: Special Use Permit request from Lennar of the Carolinas to develop 42.2 Akers on the north side of Waterstone Drive as 200 townhomes with amenities as defined in the Waterstone Master Plan for revised parcel 15 and 17. Part of OC PIN 9873-33-3376 Ms. Hauth reviewed that last fall the board approved the master plan amendment and decided to cap this parcel at 200 townhomes with amenities. There are no waiver requests with this SUP application. Ms. Hauth referred to the traffic impact memo in the board packets. This is a reduction in traffic from the earlier plan to build a retirement community. In 2011 when other amendments were made, Waterstone developers and Stagecoach Run residents came to some agreements and these plans appear to be in compliance with those agreements. The town had also required access to the Terry property to the east of this site. The plan accommodates that (because the Terry property doesn’t have good access to NC 86). Lennar provided a tree survey for the property. It’s almost a completely wooded site so there will be tree loss and this site has a little bit more tree preservation throughout it than we’ve seen on other sites. She reviewed the Parks and Recreation Board review. Orange County has confirmed they can provide recycling bins, and Waste Industries confirmed trash pickup. Commissioner Ferguson asked for clarification on the community gardens recommendation from Parks and Rec. Commissioner Lowen said it was a suggestion, not binding, no specific plans. Ms. Hauth was sworn in and acknowledged this is a quasi-judicial process. Michael Birch with Morningstar Law Group, representing the applicant, was sworn in. Mr. Birch said this is a SUP for a 200 townhome development on Parcel 17. He noted the walking trails through the amenity area are private, HOA property. Given proximity to the pool and clubhouse and because of liability, we want to clarify that those trails are private. Ryan Akers, civil engineer, and Rachel Cotter, landscape architect, both with McAdams, were sworn in. Mr. Akers said parcel 15 has been preserved for commercial. Eight months ago the board approved the changes to Parcel 17, allowing up to 200 units. This is coming forward now with a SUP. He reviewed the details of the property including 4.7 dwelling units per acre density. He pointed to a map and indicated the site has two access points and provides a public right of way access to Ms. Terry’s property. There are sidewalks on both side of the road. The streets are privately maintained. He spoke to the topography of the site (steep). There is shallow rock. We’re trying to work with the topography. There is a permanent Planning Board Minutes July 21, 2016 Page 4 of 7 undisturbed buffer of 25 feet along the Durham Tech property, Parcel 15, and Ms. Terry’s property. There’s a 100-foot undisturbed buffer to the north with Stagecoach Run, per agreement. Ms. Cotter added there is an intent to provide a number of gathering spaces for residents within the development. At key intersections, they will provide seating areas, enhanced landscaping so people have a place to meet. There is open space for future community gathering space. Such open space could be locations of community gardens, to be determined in the future by the HOA. Ms. Cotter pointed out playground, picnic table areas with grills, field for soccer or any other play. Fitness stations surround that. There are gazebos. Mr. Akers reviewed the four standards and goals and how the plans meet them. He shared that in his professional opinion, the plans meet them. Mr. Wehrman asked what if anything changed since the presentation at the Parks and Recreation Board meeting. Ms. Cotter said we updated the graphic and specifically called out open areas as future community gathering spaces. Mayor Stevens asked what the yellow line is on the map– the trail. Mayor Stevens said Durham Tech is nearby and there will probably be a coffee shop. I understand that it’s private property but do we understand that people will cut through, using this private trail. Mr. Birch said it may be informally used by them. This will be turned over to an HOA which may want to have control over it. There is a steep grade to climb up to it (indicating on map). Mayor Stevens said, so on the record, we encourage that kind of pedestrian, informal use. The notion of a town feel is that we walk between neighborhoods. This is not a gated facility. I just want to be on the record that this is important to us. Mr. Birch said I understand and this trail won’t be gated. Chair Barker said if the HOA posts signs saying don’t use the trail, what is the alternative path? Mr. Akers said there are sidewalks all along Waterstone Drive. Commissioner Ferguson said we don’t want gated communities. She said if there is no trespassing, that’s a gated community. She indicated an intent to discuss this further while deliberating on the permit. Commissioner Weaver said she has aversion to cul-de-sacs and asked if there is a reason you have two. Mr. Birch said from an engineering standpoint, elevation change here, to do a gridded network, you get steep streets. We’re trying to keep this ADA compliant. The site closest to Stagecoach is steep. Commissioner Ferguson asked what is the impact is if you take out the cul-de-sacs. Mr. Birch said there are engineering features, stormwater ponds. It’s just not pragmatic. Tom Hester, appraiser, was sworn in. Mr. Hester said he is a state certified general appraiser. He has been appraising for 35 years. He said he was asked to evaluate whether this proposed project negatively impact the neighborhoods. He has investigated other townhome properties in this jurisdiction. He looked at GIS data for sales as well as the MLS listings in the last 2.5 years. This project is not really unusual in terms of the townhouses at this location. Nothing about this project strikes me as being offensive to neighboring property owners, he said. The question would be how does this impact single family homes. The closest ones are to the north and those are deeply wooded lots. It would be a very minor impact if any effect. The other properties on either side are not single family homes. It is my conclusion that this proposed project would not have any negative effect on neighbors or development patterns. Planning Board Minutes July 21, 2016 Page 5 of 7 Chair Barker asked about the commercial property on the front property. Is it buildable? How large a storefront? Mr. Birch said the applicant doesn’t own that portion of land so they did not evaluate it. Beverly Kinsella was sworn in. She said she and her husband live in Waterstone Terrace townhomes. We wonder about the impact on our neighborhood and property values. In February, we were led to believe there would be businesses eventually and a grocery store. Another resident in the audience added that we’re being taxed to bring in the retail. Maria Dowle was sworn in. I don’t know what to call the assessment on the new builds, around $800 a year for the next 8 years. We’re paying these extra fees. She would like to see more grocery options in Hillsborough. Mayor Stevens said welcome to Hillsborough if you’re new here. The special assessment district, the additional assessment goes through the tax bill and pays for the road and water and sewer. Before 2008, developers would up front put in water/sewer roads and when banks stopped lending, this was created. Mayor Stevens encouraged these residents to look at the master plan. Now that you’re there, we can come out and talk to you. Call me, call our staff or any other commissioners to ask. Chair Barker suggested following Tom Stevens on Facebook. Ms. Hauth answered why Cates Creek Parkway is still closed (first set of signs for traffic circle were damaged by construction vehicles). Steve Kinsella was sworn in. Mr. Kinsella said since we were given to understand that Parcel 17 would be entirely retail, is there retail space remaining in Waterstone that could support a full-sized grocery store. Ms. Hauth explained Stratford requested more residential uses because they could not find commercial interest in this site. Yes, there are still sites large enough to attract a grocery store. Frank Cohen was sworn in. Mr. Cohen said the private market isn’t supporting retail yet because there isn’t enough residential. He has reached out to businesses he would like to see come to Hillsborough. If they hear from enough people, they’ll look at the feasibility of building here. MOTION: Commissioner Weaver moved to close the public hearing. Ms. Sykes seconded. VOTE: Unanimous ITEM #7: Future Land Use Plan amendment to reclassify properties south of I-40 to designations that do not allow residential development Ms. Hauth said this affects 4 tracts. All of Hillsborough’s zoning districts allow single family housing. That is common. That causes concern from the county’s perspective because these properties south of 40 are really for jobs/employment/retail. They’ve asked for these re-classifications to make it less likely that Hillsborough will receive residential requests. Mayor Stevens asked whether action was expected at this meeting. Ms. Hauth said no, it has to go through this hearing process. MOTION: Commissioner Ferguson moved to close the public hearing on this item. Ms. Frazier seconded. VOTE: Uanimous Planning Board Minutes July 21, 2016 Page 6 of 7 ITEM #8: Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendments to: a. Amend minimum parking requirements for child day care, attached dwellings, and warehouse operations. Ms. Hauth reviewed that some recent apartment complexes have brought forward numbers supporting that they don’t need so much parking. The Planning Board is suggesting if it’s a smaller project, 100 or fewer dwellings, go ahead and keep 2 spaces per unit. But go with one space per bedroom and 4 visitor spaces per 100 dwellings for bigger projects. Mayor Stevens checked that developers can ask for waivers, but I believe we can ask for conditions. Mr. Hornik said if SUP, yes. But if zoned appropriately and meets the standard, then you can’t. Commissioner Lloyd arrived from the Fire Department meeting during this item. Ms. Hauth said for daycare centers, 1 space for 357 SF space is not a lot of parking. Staff is recommending go back to 1 per staff person and 1 per 8 students. That was what Little School was approved under. For storage and warehouse uses, most have low employment and little need for customers to come to the site. We’re recommending previous standard of 1 per employee and 3 visitor spaces. MOTION: Commissioner Ferguson moved to close the public hearing on this item. Commissioner Weaver seconded. VOTE: No vote. b. Amend Section 9 to clarify that building setbacks are measured from property lines, not easements or private road boundaries. Ms. Hauth reviewed the recent case the BOA reviewed. Private roads are more common. The ordinance specifically excludes the private road area. Staff was thinking if you can’t count it as part of your minimum lot size, the setback should start at the edge of it. The Planning Board disagrees and believes the setback should be measured from the property line. We still don’t want people to build within the easement or right of way. It was recognized that there was no vote on item a. MOTION: Ms. Vandemark moved to close this public hearing item and a (because of the lack of vote). Ms. Frazier seconded. VOTE: Unanimous ITEM #9: Joint discussion about possible enforcement of non-conforming situations Ms. Hauth said there are a handful of singlewide mobile homes around town that are not actively being used. Some are secondary unit where there’s a primary dwelling. Prior to the UDO, there was a stipulation that a singlewide can only be used as a dwelling. That language didn’t make it into the UDO. The ordinance does allow an existing mobile home to be replaced within 6 months. There isn’t a limit to the number of times you do that. It has to be an equal standard of mobile home or better. The Planning Board raised the question should the town be more aggressive in contacting the owner of an unoccupied mobile home in a handful of situations. The owner would be notified that it’s a nonconforming use and asked to haul it off. Commissioner Ferguson said indicated her support, noting a condition in her neighborhood that could use attention. Mr. Brewer asked Ms. Hauth if she’s asking for the trigger to enforce. If something is brought to your attention, you follow up on it. If it doesn’t have broken windows, fallen in roof, we just say it’s the same as a vacant house, a vacant lot. Commissioner Weaver said I’m sympathetic to the extreme situation that Commissioner Ferguson has brought up. If it’s a sound structure, I’m not sure who we are to tell people to Planning Board Minutes July 21, 2016 Page 7 of 7 get rid of it. Mr. Czar asked what recourse does a person have. Ms. Hauth said the appeal would go to the Board of Adjustment. Commissioner Ferguson said the only time you would send notice is if it was an extreme blight. Mr. Peterson said maybe we’d be way better off finding other housing that’s affordable that meets building standards. He suggested allowing residents to stay in dilapidated mobile homes is a disservice. Commissioner Ferguson said we’ve got some that are horrible. Mayor Stevens said that’s Minimal Housing Standards and we have several houses that don’t meet those. Ms. Hauth said renters have come to understand if they call to complain then the landlord could close the unit and make it unavailable for rent. There was a question about rental change-out inspections. Ms. Hauth answered that the state law authorizing rental change-out inspections is only for a site that has had a number of violations in a set period of time. Tenants just don’t call. Mr. Peterson asked whether the language of living in the structure ought to be put back in. Chair Barker asked for a show of hands supporting putting the language back in the UDO that the mobile home must be used for residential purposes. Hands didn’t go up. Commissioner Ferguson said she’s not convinced there’s enough reason to take that step. Ashley DeSena asked to speak on this item. She said she was hoping you wouldn’t bring the provision back into the UDO. As long as the property is maintained, it wouldn’t be anything more than an eye sore. You don’t want the whole neighborhood to take on the character of properties that aren’t meeting certain standards. She cautioned against being unfriendly toward mobile homes and tiny homes, which are also often classified as mobile homes. ITEM #10: Joint discussion about possible adjustments to hearing schedule to accommodate no elected board meetings in July for 2017. Ms. Hauth provided options. Mayor Stevens and Commissioner Lowen said if it means JPH is the only meeting we attend in July, we’ll do that. Commissioner Ferguson supported keeping the public hearing in July but not holding board meetings. Others agreed. ITEM #11: Adjourn MOTION: Commissioner Lowen moved to adjourn at 8:54 p.m. Commissioner Ferguson seconded. VOTE: Unanimous Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Hauth Secretary